The James Bond Submariner

Donald Grant

Just wanted you all to be aware that part of my article about the James Bond Submariner was re-tooled by a member of The Rolex Forum and posted as his own. I found the posts while lurking there. I spoke to the forum owner over there, and he was nice enough to remove the offending posts and let me clarify who, indeed, wrote the article. Here is the link to my post:

http://www.rolexforums.com/showthread.php?t=37860

7289

Looks like your article is very popular on the Rolex forum, no doubt because it is so well written!

Too bad someone had to try and hijack your article. As someone who has been lucky enough to get an article published on this forum, that kind of plagerism worries me too. Glad you were able to get it resolved so cleanly.

{[]

Donald Grant

7289,

Yes, I'm glad too. I spent an awefull lot of time putting that article together and I just could not let it go un-corrected. After all it was my hard work. But, as I said over there, it's quite flattering that such a well respected member thought my work was so good.

DG

7289

DG,

Part of doing any article is taking time to "source" your information. Someone with a high profile should know that and give you the proper credit. No doubt in a similiar vein - your name would be "up in lights" if you wrote something that was not correct.

Hopefully the fellow on the Rolex Forum got the point and will be more careful in future - and be thankful for the way you handled this.

Sir Miles

I'm pleased you got it sorted too - it must be really frustrating to spend all your time researching and writing a piece just for some lazy sod to use it as their own.

Asp9mm

DG your watch article and 7289's on the novels pistols are the best and most definitive studies out there, the only possible way any of those articles could be improved was if I wrote them

Donald Grant

Sir Miles wrote:

I'm pleased you got it sorted too - it must be really frustrating to spend all your time researching and writing a piece just for some lazy sod to use it as their own.

Sir Miles,

Yes I'm glad I got it sorted out too. The owner of the site was very nice and so was just about everyone else there including the other Moderators. There was one person who was not so nice and tried to imply that the "other fellow" wrote his article years before mine was published. It was simply not true. Later, in some PM's he suggested that I should be ashamed of my self for calling out the "other fellow" who is apparently older and somewhat sickly. Knowing the situation, I tried to be as gentle as possible, but in the end I told him the shame should lie with the "other fellow", not me.

DG

Clarky

I wanted you all to know that some of my article about the 007 Submariner was sampled by a member of a Rolex Forum and posted as his own. I found the posts while visiting there. I got in touch with the forum owner over there, and he was decent enough to remove the plagiarized article and let me make clear who, in reality, wrote the article.:)) ) ) ) )

Donald Grant

Clarky wrote:

I wanted you all to know that some of my article about the 007 Submariner was sampled by a member of a Rolex Forum and posted as his own. I found the posts while visiting there. I got in touch with the forum owner over there, and he was decent enough to remove the plagiarized article and let me make clear who, in reality, wrote the article.:)) ) ) ) )

I'm not sure what you mean by that, but I assure you I did not find the episode very funny. Perhaps you should explain yourself.

DG

Clarky

Donald Grant wrote:

Clarky wrote:

I wanted you all to know that some of my article about the 007 Submariner was sampled by a member of a Rolex Forum and posted as his own. I found the posts while visiting there. I got in touch with the forum owner over there, and he was decent enough to remove the plagiarized article and let me make clear who, in reality, wrote the article.:)) ) ) ) )

I'm not sure what you mean by that, but I assure you I did not find the episode very funny. Perhaps you should explain yourself.

DG

I am just making a joke, by taking the first thing you wrote in this thread and "re-tooling" it to simulate my stealing stuff you wrote.

I didn't think the situation is funny that someone actually stole you work. I was just being ironic because obviously what I "stole" was from this thread and the source could easily be seen. At least, I thought it could easily be seen.

I added all of the little laughing guys so as to indicate it was a joke. Originally, I wasn't going to add the smileys, but I thought it might be too subtle and misconstrued.

Anywho, subtle, ironical, and sarcastic jokes are my sense of humor. I thought it was kind of a British thing, but I am afraid it must just be a Clarky thing; because few people get me in the States either. If I offended you, it was not my intention. I had hoped you'd get a laugh out of it. {[] From a cheeky |)

Clarky

AND after I posted my apology; I saw you were in the States too. So, I am batting a 1.000

Donald Grant

Clarky wrote:

Donald Grant wrote:

Clarky wrote:

I wanted you all to know that some of my article about the 007 Submariner was sampled by a member of a Rolex Forum and posted as his own. I found the posts while visiting there. I got in touch with the forum owner over there, and he was decent enough to remove the plagiarized article and let me make clear who, in reality, wrote the article.:)) ) ) ) )

I'm not sure what you mean by that, but I assure you I did not find the episode very funny. Perhaps you should explain yourself.

DG

I am just making a joke, by taking the first thing you wrote in this thread and "re-tooling" it to simulate my stealing stuff you wrote.

I didn't think the situation is funny that someone actually stole you work. I was just being ironic because obviously what I "stole" was from this thread and the source could easily be seen. At least, I thought it could easily be seen.

I added all of the little laughing guys so as to indicate it was a joke. Originally, I wasn't going to add the smileys, but I thought it might be too subtle and misconstrued.

Anywho, subtle, ironical, and sarcastic jokes are my sense of humor. I thought it was kind of a British thing, but I am afraid it must just be a Clarky thing; because few people get me in the States either. If I offended you, it was not my intention. I had hoped you'd get a laugh out of it. {[] From a cheeky |)

Clarky,

No problem. When I said "re-tooled", I was being extremely kind, and I do mean "extremely" kind to the "other fellow", if you get my meaning. Anyway, no harm, no foul.

DG

matthewarmitage

DG,

I have just read this and the related piece that YOU wrote and must say I thoroughly enjoyed it, well researched, informed and well written..

I remember some years ago a story of how Royal Navy Submariners who were issued these watches fastened one to a periscope to test its ability under water and after "going down" and resurfacing found it to be functioning perfectly!!! I cant relate the actual depth..

My own personal choice for "best" is my Rolex Sea Dweller no bubble on date as in my past experience had got caught on something, for work I use the Royal Marines SF divers watch.. Good kit.{[]

Donald Grant

matthewarmitage wrote:

DG,

I have just read this and the related piece that YOU wrote and must say I thoroughly enjoyed it, well researched, informed and well written..

I remember some years ago a story of how Royal Navy Submariners who were issued these watches fastened one to a periscope to test its ability under water and after "going down" and resurfacing found it to be functioning perfectly!!! I cant relate the actual depth..

My own personal choice for "best" is my Rolex Sea Dweller no bubble on date as in my past experience had got caught on something, for work I use the Royal Marines SF divers watch.. Good kit.{[]

By "Royal Marines SF divers watch", do you mean the present day issue pvd coated SBS watch. If so, I've had my eye on it for a while and have been considering its purchase. The only draw-back is that the present issue SBS dive watch as well as the Royal Navy dive watch have quartz movements. You can still get the automatic version of the Royal Navy dive watch today (the one that directly replaced the Royal Navy Mil. Submariner and the Royal Navy Mil. Omega Seamaster 300) but it wont have the Royal Navy or Royal Marines serial numbers on the back. I think they still retain the MOD Broadarrow though.

DG

Clarky

The CWC SBS watch is one that I have been wanting for sometime. I actually ordered one from Silverman's back in 2001. September 2nd to be precise. When the World Trade Center was attacked it was supposed to been shipped. Of course, the US halted all air traffic and Silverman's said it would be some time before they could get it shipped. I had also ordered the 007 style NATO straps too they had been shipped but it took three additional week to get it and I had to register as an importer and exporter in the US. It was going to take months so they refunded my money.

Long story, short (Too late.) I have a RN Diver that I love, so I know the SBS watch would be a great watch.

Donald Grant

Clarky wrote:

The CWC SBS watch is one that I have been wanting for sometime. I actually ordered one from Silverman's back in 2001. September 2nd to be precise. When the World Trade Center was attacked it was supposed to been shipped. Of course, the US halted all air traffic and Silverman's said it would be some time before they could get it shipped. I had also ordered the 007 style NATO straps too they had been shipped but it took three additional week to get it and I had to register as an importer and exporter in the US. It was going to take months so they refunded my money.

Long story, short (Too late.) I have a RN Diver that I love, so I know the SBS watch would be a great watch.

Yep, I'm kinda torn with getting the SBS watch. To me it represents what 007 might have worn at one time in his expanded universe, particularly in light of the fact that this re-booted Bond was an SBS operative. I'm also fond of military issue watches in general. The down side is that the issue watches for the RN and RM from the early 80's and on are all quartz watches and I prefer mechanical watches. Still, you can't beat a genuine issue military watch, and being a watch nut I suspect a few of the CWC military watches will make it into my collection. For the rest of you, Silvermans, as Clarky mentioned, is the only place you can get genuine issue RN, RM, RAF and RA CWC (Cabot Watch Company) watches.

As for the expanded universe of Bond watches, the RN Omega Seamaster 300, the Cyma RN Diver, the RN Rolex 5513 and RM Rolex 5517, as well as the Precista RN Diver should all be considered for your collections depending on which Bond you prefer and the timeline of Royal Navy service you use.

DG

Asp9mm

I highly recommend it DG, they are excellent watches.

Red Indian

I have a CWC automatic non-date diver and I also highly recommend it. Out of all of the dive watches I've owned over the years it is hands-down my favorite!

Donald Grant

Asp9mm wrote:

DG your watch article and 7289's on the novels pistols are the best and most definitive studies out there, the only possible way any of those articles could be improved was if I wrote them

I agree that 7289's article on Bond's guns was excellent as well. I hope he has more in the pipe-line. What say you 7289?

DG

BasildonBond

Donald Grant wrote:

Just wanted you all to be aware that part of my article about the James Bond Submariner was re-tooled by a member of The Rolex Forum and posted as his own. I found the posts while lurking there. I spoke to the forum owner over there, and he was nice enough to remove the offending posts and let me clarify who, indeed, wrote the article. Here is the link to my post:

http://www.rolexforums.com/showthread.php?t=37860

DG,

Where would I find your original article? I wouldn't mind having a read.
Thanks,
BB

Donald Grant

BasildonBond wrote:

Donald Grant wrote:

Just wanted you all to be aware that part of my article about the James Bond Submariner was re-tooled by a member of The Rolex Forum and posted as his own. I found the posts while lurking there. I spoke to the forum owner over there, and he was nice enough to remove the offending posts and let me clarify who, indeed, wrote the article. Here is the link to my post:

http://www.rolexforums.com/showthread.php?t=37860

DG,

Where would I find your original article? I wouldn't mind having a read.
Thanks,
BB

Here you go:

http://www.ajb007.co.uk/articles/rolex-submariner/

DG

BasildonBond

DG,

A thorough article, nice work.

BB